Text Size

-

+

reset

Going into last year’s House campaign, McCarthy gave congressional candidates copies of Lewis’s 2003 book that was adapted for the film.

McCarthy charted House races with a specific set of metrics about campaign spending and candidate demographics, the political equivalent of finding ways to maximize reaching first base and scoring runs. Republicans took back the House, and now, they argue that economic policies should be backed up by extensive data-driven analysis.

In a letter last month, House Speaker John Boehner, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and other GOP leaders told Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to avoid additional forms of stimulus without “ample data proving a case for economic action and quantifiable benefits to the American people.”

In the debate over jobs, McCarthy backs an approach that minimizes costs for the government, one that draws on outside sources of funding, analogous to the Athletics’ use of aging slugger David Justice, he said.

The Yankees agreed to cover half of Justice’s $7 million salary if the Athletics took him off their roster, meaning the so-called Bronx Bombers were essentially paying him to play against them. Similarly, Congress should leverage the holdings of private companies to produce more jobs, the congressman said.

McCarthy noted that U.S. corporations have more than $2 trillion of cash sitting on the sidelines, money that could be put on the field to help a stalled economy suffering 9.1 percent unemployment.

“What I would do is find out what unshackles them,” he said, “and use that as a stimulus.”

McCarthy, who paid his way through college after founding a deli, explained that increasing the number of start-ups is a critical step for lowering unemployment.

Companies with fewer than 500 employees, he noted, added 7 million jobs between 2001 and 2007. Larger corporations cut a million jobs during that time.

Entrepreneurship suffered with the recession. The country created 550,000 new businesses in 2006, a figure that dropped to about 400,000 during the downturn, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures analyzed in a July report by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

As an example of how “Moneyball” translates into policy, McCarthy unveiled a bill making it easier for start-ups to attract capital.

Under current rules, smaller businesses have to go through the expensive process of registering with the Securities and Exchange Commission before approaching accredited investors.

McCarthy’s bill would lift that restriction. Rather than applying for loans and making monthly payments, start-ups could offer investors equity in the company.

The congressman said his measure should eventually lead to more jobs, though he refrained from saying just how many.

“You have to have the country believe in the long-term perspective,” he said. “So those who do have capital say, ‘It is a good time, but tomorrow will look better.’”

Readers' Comments (8)

Baseball metaphors aside, here's a "matrix of measurement" for McCarthy to consider: For $1bn invested in a new coal plant, you get fewer than 900 jobs, for solar you get 1,900 jobs, for wind turbines 3,300 jobs, and [for] retrofitting buildings, 7,000-8,000 jobs.

So, if McCarthy really wants looking at the numbers, why does his party still skew all energy investments towards oil & coal?

(Maybe we should look at a different matrix, i.e who are the big contributors to the GOP.)

Only an idiot sells future equity for immediate cash at the outset. And no investor in their right mind is gonna invest if the venture doesn't have the cash reserve's to cover the basic interest payment, much less the initial principal. McCarthy's plan is a basic pie-in-the-sky plan that, in effect, hopes that the economy turns around in time for the cash flow's of the start-up's to meet at or before the interest payment's are due. And that folk's is Hail Mary economics, pure and simple. What is needed is for that $2 trillion that the banks are sitting on, that we paid for in the bailout's in case anyone has forgotten, to be put out on the street for these start-up's to get access to so they can start their R&D, their prototyping, their facilities and logistics planning, their marketing and hiring.

What is almost criminal, and in fact may be if the terms of these bailout's is looked at more thoroughly, is that the bailout money, and the current SBA Business Loan guarantee's, are all sitting on these bank's balance sheet's as a hard liquid asset, not as a working loan producing interest. The start-up sector has been all but starved out of the market for funding as the banks are just sitting on the money and thumbing their nose's at the rest of us as if to dare anyone to say 'Boo'. And I sure don't see anyone on the House Financial Services Comittee or the House Ways and Means Comittee, or the Federal Reserve for that matter, getting off their butt's to do anything about it either. The GOP wants to see the power of small business , or more correctly the lack of any and it's impact on the unemployment number's, when it comes time for the next election cycle ? Fine. Let Dave Camp, Freddy Upton, Texas Jed, Iowa Steve and Eric the Brat keep sitting on their collective 'wisdom' and watch what happens political and economic commentator's start pointing out that it's the GOP's, and the Tea Party's, campaign contributor's who are responsible for these same bank's starving the economy for start-up funding that was supposedly a requirement for the bank's to get their bailout loan's in the 1st place simply to keep their own bank's balance sheet's fat at the expense of the rest of the country. Even Boehner can see the writing on the wall at this stage. So can the unemployed, and they vote !

And with Perry, and his magical 'Texas model' plan, eventually going down in flames, you can bet that Ol' Kay Bailey Hutchinson (who is remarkably silent right now and watching what is going on) is gonna be the 1st vulture to circle the carcass when the next Texas Gubernatorial elections start up. And as far as McCarthy is concerned, well, one only has to look at the current mess that the Raider's are in to see where he's getting his info from. Between the Raider's front office, the current owner (regretabbly now not Al Davis), the NFL Team Owner's, the Oakland and the LA City Council's, is it a wonder why any plan coming out of the Bay area is subject to more than a little extra 'look-see' ?

I'm all for making government scientifically smarter. We have seen signs of it doing just that in the Affordable Care Act, which has funded, built-in, scientific studies that will provide valuable information for corrective legislation that will likely be needed to make various elements more effective, cost-efficient, et cetera. Perhaps needless to say, I don't much trust Republicans that push for a more scientific approach to the creation of legislation, for Republicans tend to unethically manipulate and even make up their numbers and data (unlike scrupulous scientists).

There is a ring of truth to what McCarthy is saying. Popular movies are a great source of information for fixing societies problems. Popular software games are equally important. Every Quarter I send an Earthquake to distroy my Sim Citys and rebuild each from scratch. I can proudly say that with each rebuild my cities improve dramatically. So believe me, if I could send another earthquake to Washington I would.

And the stats say ... ten years of tax cuts, no jobs. What did we get for our HUGE deficit, GOPers? Two wars, a lot of very rich people and a booming pharmaceutical company fed by the Republican socialist Medicare Part D. We're the envy of the free world! oh, wait I meant China.

Baseball metaphors aside, here's a "matrix of measurement" for McCarthy to consider: For $1bn invested in a new coal plant, you get fewer than 900 jobs, for solar you get 1,900 jobs, for wind turbines 3,300 jobs, and [for] retrofitting buildings, 7,000-8,000 jobs.

So, if McCarthy really wants looking at the numbers, why does his party still skew all energy investments towards oil & coal?

(Maybe we should look at a different matrix, i.e who are the big contributors to the GOP.)